{"title":"Unveiling the Impact of Three-Dimensional Technology on Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Methini Werathammo, Kachorn Seresirikachorn, Prapitphan Charoenlux","doi":"10.1055/a-2370-2125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to investigate the impact of three-dimensional (3D) technology on preoperative evaluation for rhinoplasty.A systematic search was conducted on Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that utilized 3D technology in preoperative assessment for rhinoplasty were included. The primary outcome was surgeon and patient satisfaction. The secondary outcomes included nasal function, cost-efficiency, reoperation rate, precision, and surgical time.Twelve studies (595 patients) were included. Surgeons reported higher satisfaction with 3D approaches based on precision and postoperative results. Patients expressed satisfaction with the 3D approaches due to a better understanding of the procedure and the ability to discuss with the surgeons planning the procedure and participating in postoperative design. The 3D approaches demonstrated higher surgeon satisfaction (mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.20 to -0.06, <i>p</i> = 0.0002), particularly in revision cases, and provided higher precision compared with the two-dimensional (2D) approaches. However, 3D technology was more expensive and not cost-efficient. There were no significant differences in reoperation rate (odds ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-1.36, <i>p</i> = 0.09) and surgical time. Postoperative nasal function showed inconsistent results.3D technology offered higher surgeon satisfaction and increased precision compared with 2D imaging. However, 3D imaging was expensive and not cost-efficient. Reoperation rate and surgical time were comparable, while postoperative nasal function outcomes showed inconsistent results.</p>","PeriodicalId":12195,"journal":{"name":"Facial Plastic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facial Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2370-2125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the impact of three-dimensional (3D) technology on preoperative evaluation for rhinoplasty.A systematic search was conducted on Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that utilized 3D technology in preoperative assessment for rhinoplasty were included. The primary outcome was surgeon and patient satisfaction. The secondary outcomes included nasal function, cost-efficiency, reoperation rate, precision, and surgical time.Twelve studies (595 patients) were included. Surgeons reported higher satisfaction with 3D approaches based on precision and postoperative results. Patients expressed satisfaction with the 3D approaches due to a better understanding of the procedure and the ability to discuss with the surgeons planning the procedure and participating in postoperative design. The 3D approaches demonstrated higher surgeon satisfaction (mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.20 to -0.06, p = 0.0002), particularly in revision cases, and provided higher precision compared with the two-dimensional (2D) approaches. However, 3D technology was more expensive and not cost-efficient. There were no significant differences in reoperation rate (odds ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-1.36, p = 0.09) and surgical time. Postoperative nasal function showed inconsistent results.3D technology offered higher surgeon satisfaction and increased precision compared with 2D imaging. However, 3D imaging was expensive and not cost-efficient. Reoperation rate and surgical time were comparable, while postoperative nasal function outcomes showed inconsistent results.
目的:本研究旨在探讨三维技术(3D)对鼻整形术术前评估的影响:方法:在 EMBASE、MEDLINE 和 Web of Science 上进行了系统检索。方法:在 EMBASE、MEDLINE 和 Web Science 上进行了系统检索,纳入了在鼻整形术术前评估中使用三维技术的研究。主要结果是外科医生和患者的满意度。次要结果包括鼻功能、成本效益、再手术率、精确度和手术时间:结果:共纳入 12 项研究(595 名患者)。根据精确度和术后效果,外科医生对三维方法的满意度较高。患者对三维方法表示满意,因为他们能更好地了解手术过程,并能与外科医生讨论手术计划和参与术后设计。与二维方法相比,三维方法的外科医生满意度更高(平均差异为-0.13,95%CI为-0.20至-0.06,p=0.0002),尤其是在翻修病例中,而且精度更高。然而,三维技术更为昂贵,成本效益不高。再次手术率(OR 0.16,95% CI 0.02 至 1.36,P=0.09)和手术时间没有明显差异。术后鼻功能结果不一致:结论:与二维成像技术相比,三维成像技术可提高外科医生的满意度并提高精确度。结论:与二维成像技术相比,三维成像技术可提高外科医生的满意度并增加精确度,但三维成像技术价格昂贵,成本效益不高。再手术率和手术时间相当,而术后鼻功能结果却不一致。
期刊介绍:
Facial Plastic Surgery is a journal that publishes topic-specific issues covering areas of aesthetic and reconstructive plastic surgery as it relates to the head, neck, and face. The journal''s scope includes issues devoted to scar revision, periorbital and mid-face rejuvenation, facial trauma, facial implants, rhinoplasty, neck reconstruction, cleft palate, face lifts, as well as various other emerging minimally invasive procedures.
Authors provide a global perspective on each topic, critically evaluate recent works in the field, and apply it to clinical practice.